The Charlotte News

Friday, April 30, 1954


Site Ed. Note: The front page reports that in the seventh day of the nationally televised hearings regarding the dispute between the Army and Senator McCarthy, James Juliana, an investigator for the Senate Investigations subcommittee, normally chaired by Senator McCarthy, testified this date that he had ordered the printing of a controversial cropped version of a photograph, showing only Secretary of the Army Robert Stevens and Private G. David Schine, when actually two other persons, one of whom had only his left arm in the picture, had been present in the original uncropped photograph. Mr. Juliana testified that he had ordered enlargements of both the cropped and uncropped versions of the photo, and had delivered only the cropped version to the Senate subcommittee investigating the matter because he thought that was what the subcommittee desired, though no one had actually so stated to him. He said it was based only on his own decision, stating, in answer to a question by special counsel for the subcommittee Ray Jenkins, that Mr. Jenkins specifically had not asked him to provide a photograph of the the two men alone. He further said that he had instructed Don Surine, assistant counsel for the subcommittee, to prepare enlargements of both versions of the photograph. During the afternoon session, special counsel for the Army, Joseph Welch, in cross-examining Mr. Juliana, had asked him at one point whether he knew that the photograph, in its original version, had hung in the New York office of Private Schine, to which Mr. Juliana stated very firmly that he did not know that to be a fact, prompting an incredulous Mr. Welch to ask him offhandedly whether or not he believed that the picture had derived from a "pixie", causing Senator McCarthy to ejaculate an interjection seeking definition of that word, as he believed Mr. Welch an expert on the subject, Mr. Welch then indicating that it meant a "close relative of a fairy", to which the Senator again expressed his belief that Mr. Welch was an authority on the subject.

Private Schine, in brief testimony during the morning session this date—after having testified during the whole afternoon session of the prior day, demonstrating some confusion over the exact date when he delivered the original, uncropped photograph at the request of either Roy Cohn, normally chief counsel for the subcommittee, or Francis Carr, another staff member, at a meeting at the Colony Restaurant, which he had finally stated as occurring the prior Monday, and regarding whether George Anastos, a member of Senator McCarthy's staff to whom Mr. Schine said he initially delivered the photograph, was present, along with Mr. Cohn, Senator McCarthy, Mr. Carr, Mr. Juliana and Maj. General Kirke Lawton, the commander of Fort Monmouth—, said, after refreshing his recollection overnight, that he thought he had given an accurate account the previous day of his part in providing the photograph, taken the prior November 17 at McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey, adjacent to Fort Dix, where the Private was stationed after having been drafted the prior October—thus satisfied that the meeting was the prior Monday and not the prior Thursday or Friday, and that Mr. Anastos was not present. The Private was then excused from further testimony regarding the photograph, but was due to return to provide more general testimony later in the proceedings—which, hopefully, will expand and provide clarification on the subject of pixies and the propriety of having a butterscotch sundae on Monday, especially whether the sundae, enjoyed at the Jenkins-described "party" at the "Colony Club", which Mr. Schine had carefully corrected, no doubt euphemistically, as being only a meeting at a restaurant, also having trouble initially comprehending Mr. Jenkins's subsequent characterization of it as an "assemblage", had whipped cream and nuts on top. (Had it occurred after 1973-74, that part of the inquiry might have gone down in history as Sundaegate or at least, colorably, as Variegated Crops of Pixies.)

Mr. Welch demanded that Senator McCarthy be called to testify as soon as Secretary Stevens finished his testimony, which had been interrupted for the purpose of fleshing out the manner in which the cropped photograph had been provided to the subcommittee, a manner which Mr. Welch had claimed was deceitful and intentional, designed deliberately to show that Secretary Stevens had sought a meeting and photograph alone with Private Schine, in furtherance of the contention by Senator McCarthy and Mr. Cohn that the Secretary was eagerly complying with requests they had made for the Private's special treatment, not the result of the Army's claimed threats made by Mr. Cohn. The temporary chairman of the subcommittee, Senator Karl Mundt, reminded that only the subcommittee determined the order of witnesses, Mr. Welch indicating his understanding of that process and stating that he was only expressing his desire for that procedure to be followed.

Mr. Anastos and Frances Mims, staff employees of Senator McCarthy, testified also this date, during the morning session, that they knew nothing about the cropping of the photograph, but there was some conflict between the versions they gave regarding the handling of the photograph at staff offices.

In Geneva, an informed source said this date that Russia had demanded that India be invited to take part in the Indo-China peace talks at the conference, assumed to be another obstacle in the path of the resolution of the Indo-China war. The same source said that the Soviets might also seek participation by Indonesia and Burma in that part of the talks. The U.S. was understood to be firmly opposed to inclusion of India on the grounds that the conference should be limited to those nations with a direct interest in Southeast Asia and who had participated either in the Korean War or the Indo-China war. India's Prime Minister Nehru had recently enunciated to the Indian parliament a program for ending the Indo-China war, which would include an immediate cease-fire, a non-intervention pact by the major powers and direct negotiations between the French and the Vietminh. It had been announced that Viet Nam's chief of state Bao Dai had agreed to sit down at the conference table with representatives of the Vietminh, his previous refusal to do so having presented a major obstacle to the organization of the talks regarding Indo-China. It had been reported earlier that the East and West were in virtual agreement on inclusion of nine parties in the Indo-China portion of the conference, the U.S., Russia, Britain, France, Communist China, the Vietminh and the three Associated States of Indo-China, Viet Nam, Cambodia and Laos. If the talks were to be expanded, the U.S. was reported to favor only the addition of Thailand and Burma, as they bordered on Indo-China. Efforts to unite Korea, as part of the conference, had already been written off as virtually hopeless.

From Hanoi, it was reported that French pilots flying U.S.-supplied fighters and bombers hit again this date Vietminh concentrations ringing the embattled French fortress at Dien Bien Phu, and that transport planes resumed their missions of reinforcement under clearing skies after torrential monsoon rains had turned the area into a sea of mud since earlier in the week. The French high command reported that more parachute troops, ammunition and other war materiel had been dropped to the fortress. French commandos conducted new raids to destroy the rebel gun emplacements and arms caches set up near defense barricades, but no important infantry fighting was underway. All attempts by the Vietminh to penetrate the main French defensive positions had been repulsed the previous night and early this date, and the French communiqué for the day described the situation as "relatively calm". Vietminh heavy mortars and artillery continued to pound the French defenses of the fortress and the French guns answered by hitting the encampments of the Vietminh in the jungle-covered hills encircling the fortress. The French also struck the Communist convoys carrying supplies from Communist China. Badly needed American technicians for the Corsairs, recently provided to the French, were reported to be on their way to Indo-China from Tunisia in North Africa.

Housing administrator Albert Cole announced this date the suspension of two housing officials in Philadelphia for having failed to reply under oath to a questionnaire concerning acceptance of gratuities from persons with whom they had done housing business. They were provided five days in which to show cause why they should not be removed from the Federal service.

In New York, an official of the CIO Communication Workers of America said that the union might strike at any time against the Bell Telephone system, that they were still seeking peaceful settlement, even though their contracts had expired in some locales. Contracts under discussion included one between Western Electric and 17,000 members of the union who installed heavy equipment in 43 states and the District of Columbia, the spokesman for the union having said that among the installers, sentiment was nearly unanimous in favor of a walkout. The contract with the installers would expire on the following Sunday.

In Montgomery, Ala., Admiral John Crommelin demanded an immediate decision by the Supreme Court on school desegregation to offset what he called a "statewide belief" in Alabama that the ruling was being held up to help the re-election of Senator John Sparkman, the 1952 Democratic vice-presidential nominee. The Admiral said that in light of the time expended in a 189-mile publicized hike recently by Justice William O. Douglas, leading an entourage of journalists and nature-lovers along the Chesapeake & Ohio towpath outside Washington "to commune with the birds and the bees", it was time to provide the decision and he had sent a telegram to Chief Justice Earl Warren requesting that the opinion be issued by the following day, May 1. The story points out that normally, the Court rendered its decisions on Mondays. The Admiral was one of three candidates opposing Senator Sparkman in the upcoming Democratic primary the following Tuesday.

In Athens, Greece, the observatory seismographs registered this date an earthquake of "catastrophic intensity" about 130 miles northwest of Athens, with its epicenter in central Greece.

In Chicago, a psychiatric laboratory had been set up to examine "crazy" drivers, finding that screwball motorists were a little off in the head, capable of diagnosis under laboratory examination, with the aim of banning "these nuts from automobiles" on the streets and highways or to suspend their driving privileges until the psychiatrists could report a cure. The chief judge of the Municipal Court said that the logical suspects would include the habitual traffic offenders, those who repeatedly evaded court summonses and those whose traffic conduct was a "flagrant violation of common sense and normal judgment". Now, that latter category could include just about any driver on the roads and you know it, probably yourself from time to time, and is much too vague to pass constitutional muster.

In Denver, a gunman robbed a delicatessen of $292 the previous night and the operator of the store said that the bandit had "the meanest face" she had ever seen, adding that he had a mean disposition also, as he had even taken her pennies.

In Charlotte, the site selection commission members seeking the site of the proposed Air Force Academy arrived this date and would venture by chartered bus to the proposed area near Charlotte, about eight miles northwest of the city on the Catawba River near Huntersville. Charlotte was competing with several other locations for the site, ultimately established in Colorado Springs.

On the editorial page, "Air Force Would Be Welcome Here" indicates that establishing the Air Force Academy near Huntersville would be welcome. It thus provides some of the benefits of locating it in Mecklenburg County.

"Firing of 'Fascists' Wants Explanation" indicates that the Army-McCarthy hearings had crowded out of the news columns or into the back pages of the newspaper a large portion of Washington news which deserved more attention than it was receiving. One such item was a report by State Department security officer Scott McLeod the previous week regarding "security risk" dismissals by the Department, in which he had said that dismissals included 148 persons suspected of Communist activities and 15 who were believed to be Fascists.

It indicates that it was the first time to its knowledge that Government employees had been dismissed because of the belief that they were Fascists, causing it to wonder what the Government's standard at present was for determining that a person was a Fascist, whether it was someone who adhered to the philosophy of the former Fascist regimes which had threatened the United States, such as Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, or was an advocate of the extant Fascist regimes, such as that of Juan Peron in Argentina and of Generalissimo Francisco Franco in Spain, or whether it was a person with extreme right-wing views but no actual connection with foreign fascism. It suggests that regardless of the definition, Fascists did not warrant dismissal from the Government on the same grounds which Communists did, for the reason that there was a worldwide Communist conspiracy threatening the nation, which could be furthered by Communists within the Government, while there was no such worldwide Fascist conspiracy.

It finds that no sound conclusions could be reached until Mr. McLeod elaborated on his report, but on its face, the statement raised the suspicion that persons with unorthodox views were persona non grata to the State Department, even though they might be loyal, trustworthy and capable.

Oh, come on, you know very well that the Administration, assuming the accuracy of the report, was only attempting to apply the same standard to the right-wing persons in the State Department which had been applied all along to those of left-wing persuasion, and in neither case having anything much to do with genuine concerns about "loyalty", the result being equal opportunity offense to ward off criticism for only applying the standard to the left-wing adherents—the left-right dichotomy always being suspect in any event, as Communism, as practiced in the totalitarian states, can equally be charted as a right-wing philosophy, whereas most people in the United States, when brought to cases, are constituted by a variety of opinions, some leftist, some rightist, most in the middle.

"Eisenhower Reaffirms Congress' Role" indicates that the President had said repeatedly that he had full respect for the role of Congress in declaring war, and had made it clear that he would not commit U.S. forces to action without such a declaration. Thus, his reaffirmation of that point at the previous day's press conference was not news, but had, nevertheless, made headlines in light of the recent events involving Indo-China and the crisis at the French fortress of Dien Bien Phu, in conjunction with the ongoing Geneva peace conference, especially after Vice-President Nixon's statement of April 16 to the American Society of Newspaper Editors that the U.S. would commit ground forces to Indo-China in the event that the French withdrew, prompting a rash of responsive statements from both Congress and the State Department that no such intention existed. The President's statements the previous day apparently had been intended to quiet apprehension of the people regarding that prospect, including members of Congress.

It advises therefore that members of Congress be guarded in their public remarks on Indo-China, especially during the Geneva peace conference.

The President's statement, it further suggests, could, however, be useful to the Communists, as both Russia and Communist China were aware that Congress would likely not declare war in Indo-China, unless there were a direct attack on the U.S., similar to Pearl Harbor in 1941. Such knowledge could cause the Communists to advance their schedule for conquering all of Southeast Asia, while carefully avoiding any incident which would produce a declaration of war from Congress. It concludes that while the President's respect for the constitutional processes was reassuring, his statement the previous day, as with things understood between friends, could have been left unsaid.

"Another Way To Curb Loan Sharks" indicates that recently the column had called attention to the evils of the loan shark system in the state for want of adequate laws governing small loans, enabling loan sharks to collect hundreds of thousands of dollars annually through exorbitant charges for insurance and fees, at the expense of the poor and ignorant. The General Assembly in 1955 could halt the practice by forbidding such lenders from making charges except at a fair rate of interest. It also points out that credit unions could be formed among employees to curtail the market on which loan sharks could prey.

During the previous five years, according to Business Week, credit unions had increased in number from 9,331 to 14,398, with almost double the membership, at seven million persons, and almost triple the assets, presently standing at nearly two billion dollars. It advises employees at the mercy of loan sharks to form credit unions and urges employers to encourage them to do so.

A piece from the Norfolk Virginian-Pilot, titled "A Rabbit Story", indicates that a tale going around Washington provided evidence that there was nothing new in a funny story. It was told by Representative Omar Burleson of Texas, in a letter to his constituents, that two rabbits were running across the field as fast as they could when one had pulled up to a sudden stop, asked, "Why are we running so fast?" to which the other replied, "One of the committees is looking for a goat." So they had run off again as fast as they could, until the first rabbit again stopped, stated, "But we're not goats," to which the other replied that of course they were not but wanted to know of the first whether he could prove it.

It indicates that the story had originally appeared during the 1930's in John Gunther's Inside Europe, slightly altered to represent the rabbits as having left the Soviet Union and jumped across the Polish border, to which the Poles had expressed consternation, the rabbits explaining to Polish customs officers that "the GPU has issued an order to arrest all giraffes," to which the officers responded that they were not giraffes, the rabbits replying with the question as to whether the officials could prove it to the GPU.

It concludes that historians of humor, who insisted that there were only two or three basic jokes, probably could trace the story back through Rome and Greece to the Pharaohs, but that it might also be a case of Communist infiltration into American humor or "merely that the Moscow climate of the 1930's and the Washington climate of 1954 have the same effect on rabbits."

Drew Pearson indicates that France's censorship had blacked out the truth, but General Henri Navarre, the French commander in Indo-China, had literally been throwing away planes and paratroopers over the surrounded fortress at Dien Bien Phu. Reports had filtered back to the Pentagon that airlift planes had announced their position to Communist anti-aircraft batteries below, that for some unaccountable reason, the pilots had been reporting their exact altitude and relaying flight instructions in plain French, without bothering to use code. Thus, the anti-aircraft batteries only needed to listen to the radio messages to obtain a bearing on the arriving planes, resulting in accurate anti-aircraft fire and loss of over one-third of the reinforcements delivered by parachute. U.S. military observers had urged the French to withdraw from the fortress because it was too exposed and because General Navarre had failed to pour in enough supplies and medicine to sustain the besieged fortress. They also had suggested sending in a relief column overland to rescue the defenders, but the General had sent such a small force that it was ambushed and had to retreat. Mr. Pearson indicates that the irony was that the fortress had been erected as a trap to bait the Communists, as it had been built in deep jungles on the same theory which the natives based the baiting of a tiger with a tethered goat or lamb, then laid in wait to shoot the tiger. Strategically, Dien Bien Phu was not important, but the fight for it, entailing a heavy loss of life on both sides, was influencing world peace.

Secretary of Agriculture Ezra Taft Benson was working on a new program under which cows might soon be consuming the same milk they gave, an effort to get rid of about 589 million pounds of dried milk presently stored in Government warehouses. A portion of it was to be sold to processors of animal and poultry feed at a price of 3.5 to 4 cents per pound, only a fraction of the cost to the taxpayers but acting as a stimulant to the feed industry and likely to reduce somewhat the feed bills to farmers. Under the program of Mr. Benson's predecessor, Charles Brannan, the taxpayers got the benefit of lower milk prices resulting from the surplus, whereas under the present effort, it would be the cows, poultry, pigs and cattle consuming the product. Mr. Pearson notes that the administrator of the Commodity Stabilization Service had been the former executive vice-president of the Grange-League Federation Exchange of Ithaca, N.Y., one of the world's largest mixers and distributors of livestock feed, and that his deputy had once been the president of the American Feed Manufacturers Association.

U.S. diplomats at the Geneva peace conference had secretly sought to find out what the Chinese Communists wanted to effect settlement of the war in Indo-China and cease aid to the Vietminh guerrillas. The U.S. diplomats proposed providing Communist China with a warm-water port at Haiphong on the Tonkin Gulf, providing China with a vital trade outlet, and requiring, therefore, the partition of Indo-China into North and South. Ho Chi Minh, however, was said to be against any kind of compromise and wanted to capture Hanoi, where his rebellion had begun in 1946.

Eric Sevareid of CBS regards the newly seated Senator Eva Bowring, who was appointed by Nebraska Governor Robert Crosby to serve only until the following November special election to fill the seat of recently deceased Senator Dwight Griswold, having reportedly stated that she would not be a candidate in the special election. He indicates that it was not often that a new Senator was seated midterm, that it always caused some stir in Washington, not only within the Senate but among those who reported on it. The appointment was akin to a new girl showing up mid-semester at the sorority house, being a little defensive, and so there had been neck-craning and first-impression exchanging when Ms. Bowring first arrived.

She was a grandmother who ran a cattle ranch which consumed a considerable part of Nebraska. She had been escorted into the Senate chamber for the first time by Nebraska's other Senator, Hugh Butler, prompting Vice-President Nixon, presiding at the time, to remark that Senator Butler had asked him to inform the Senate that "no implication should be drawn from the fact" that Senator Butler was a widower and the new Senator, a widow. Mr. Sevareid remarks that Mr. Nixon must have meant "inference", not "implication", but was still not certain what he had in mind with the remark. (He probably did know but did not wish to say it in print: that Mr. Nixon was, to coin a phrase, a "male chauvinist pig engineer" and that his efforts through the years at humor often masked an undercurrent of cattiness, sometimes reaching the point of malignancy, the more so after he would become President in 1969. In any event, we are glad that Mr. Sevareid clarified the difference between "implication" and "inference", though we are not certain exactly what he meant in trying to distinguish the two, as they tend to be interchangeable, at least in their noun forms, the confusion often arising when used as verbs, when people say something like "you are inferring x, y and z" when they mean "implying" in the sense of insinuation, not the act of deduction by logic, as where "'x, y' equals z", though the Vice-President's remark would have been better stated by substituting "derive" for "be drawn".) Mr. Sevareid continues that he guesses that Senator Butler was disclaiming any romantic notions toward Senator Bowring, leading to the question as to whether he was telling the other Senate bachelors that the field was wide open or, through the negative approach, slyly putting the notion of possible romance in her mind. He says that recently, he had been compiling an innuendo and implication dictionary to help him report the Senate in the new era, but found nothing in his files covering that particular situation.

He indicates that it became even more obscure when the new Senator held her first press conference, demonstrating that she had already learned the first lesson of being a Senator, how to confuse by saying too little. He suspects that she would later learn the final lesson, how to confuse by saying too much.

One question which she had adeptly parried was whether she would run for the full Senate term, replying that it was an "amusing" question, causing the reporters to find the answer more amusing than the question. She was then asked how she stood on foreign affairs, replying, in ranchese, that she wanted to tighten her cinch before she informed of her views. In thinking back to his own Western days, Mr. Sevareid suggests that she wanted to be certain that the saddle was secure before she rode off in all directions.

When asked about her stand on farm price supports, she had answered that she did not notice that the reporter came in with his spurs on, completely baffling the "effete easterners", leaving them to await clarification at the President's next press conference, as he kept up on "wild west dialogue better than anyone else" in Washington.

When asked how she would describe her political position, she had answered that she was a "forward looking Republican" but that it should also be remembered "to look back".

He concludes that she was a lady who had not been born yesterday, could "put the water on both shoulders to the wheel, and put both ears to the ground without burying her head in the sand." He was still worried, however, about her last phrase, was a little weak on his westerns, but knew his Bible pretty well, and wished to remind the new Senator that in Washington, "ladies who look back are apt to turn into a pillar of society."

Doris Fleeson regards new California Governor J. Goodwin Knight, who had, as Lieutenant Governor, succeeded Governor Earl Warren after his recess appointment the prior October to the Supreme Court as Chief Justice. She indicates that serious students of politics had often stated that there were three major parties in the country, Republicans, Democrats and Californians, the general failure to acknowledge such a tripartite division having been responsible for the common complaint by California politicians that people, especially those in Washington, did not understand them. The complaint had been renewed by Governor Knight, who, though a Republican, was also the titular leader of California Democrats.

He was in Washington to obtain California's share of the tidelands royalties, amounting to 62 million dollars, and to participate in a drought conference, despite the fact that California was not enduring a drought.

The Governor explained his unusual status and stated his hope of being nominated in the Republican and Democratic primaries in June. By the time he had finished showering compliments on nearly all other candidates running in California, except Communists, but including James Roosevelt, running for a Congressional seat despite his very public separate maintenance suit with his estranged wife, it was clear that the Governor was a "true blue specimen of the California party".

She points out that the reason for this peculiarity was the cross-filing system, permitting every candidate to run under every party label. Other states had the system but only California had become addicted to it. Mr. Knight's claim to be titular leader of the Democrats rested on the fact that he had won the nominations of both parties when he had run in the lieutenant gubernatorial race in 1950. While Governor Warren had been re-elected for his third term as a Republican, a Democrat, Pat Brown, had been elected State Attorney General. Governor Knight appeared confident that he could win even in the primary over the Democratic nominee, Richard Graves, a former associate of Governor Warren. A major reason for the conference was his endorsement by the American Federation of Labor based on Mr. Knight having obtained for them the votes to pass a bill raising unemployment compensation from $25 to $30, and having promised to veto any anti-labor legislation, such as a right-to-work bill, during the ensuing four-year term.

We might note that while the current silly recall effort against Governor Gavin Newsom of California, spawned by right-wingies upset ostensibly about the Governor's efforts to protect the state's inhabitants and visitors against the coronavirus, is actually only seeking to exploit generalized anger and frustration directed at the coronavirus restrictions by focusing that anger and frustration on a human target, the Governor, as in other states where effective action by chief executive officers has limited the effect of the virus, the expensive, frivolous effort, at a time when State resources need to be channeled to the continuing fight to limit the spread of the deadly disease, does communicate again the undercurrent in California which appears unable over time to accept for long any Democrat as Governor outside the Brown family, without engaging in a recall at the drop of a hat, the 2003 recall, largely a reaction to rolling blackouts by P.G.& E., having taken place a year after Governor Gray Davis had won re-election decisively in 2002, and this recall election wastefully set to occur only a year before the regular 2022 gubernatorial election. This same undercurrent, fruitcake nutty as it is, appeared woefully disappointed that after the 2003 recall, they got, not "the Terminator", but "another liberal". The undercurrent keeps its record unfoiled: since 1942, no Democratic Governor has survived the full elected term without a recall effort, other than Governors Pat Brown and Jerry Brown. Hope springs eternal that, sooner or later, with enough persistence, it will be springtime for Hitler in Germany.

A letter from Fayetteville, identified only as being from "Concerned Wives", tells of the housing shortage at Fort Bragg, that they were wives of sergeants living in an apartment complex on Bragg Boulevard, and most had been notified that they would have to move onto the post into vacant housing there, that they did not mind going where their husbands went as it was good for high morale, but that they had good, clean, low-rent housing at present, which was a far cry from the housing on the base, in their view, unfit for human habitation, their having seen barns for animals in much better condition. They indicate that the Air Force had checked those housing areas and condemned them, and so ask for help in resisting the notification.

A letter writer favors equal rights for all, including conditions of employment for women, which she finds subject to restrictive laws in several states. For instance, some states limited the right of a female to dispose of property and to participate in jury duty. She indicates that it was impossible to hope for elimination of all of those discriminatory laws at once, and so favors a bill introduced by Congresswoman Katharine St. George of New York, which she believes would serve that purpose.

A letter from the public relations chairman of the County Home for unwed mothers expresses appreciation to the newspaper for its assistance in promoting the local observance of Florence Crittenton Day.

A letter writer from Monroe indicates that the Army-McCarthy hearings had the salutary byproduct of revealing the type of mentality which opposed Senator McCarthy, that much of the opposition came from sincere people who had been "deluded by the perversion of truth, perpetrated by those to whom the disseminating of news has been entrusted", a group for whom he could find sympathy and understanding. But he also finds that there was another group who were extremely difficult to understand with any sympathy, those with "trained intellect, which while in full possession of the facts of the case, deletes, perverts, and misconstrues the facts in order to present a totally false picture while smugly labeling it a sane well-rounded presentation." He indicates that such a picture had been presented by the editorial on the page of April 27 and by the preceding day's editorial cartoon, portraying Senator McCarthy as a villain on trial for having browbeaten individuals in the executive branch of the Government who had not performed like puppets for him, and that with his influence in Congress, had attempted to dictate policies in the executive branch. He finds that Senate Investigations subcommittee special counsel Ray Jenkins had presented the actual case, resolving into two issues, whether the Senator and his aides had used improper influence to obtain special treatment for Private Schine, and whether Secretary of the Army Stevens and his aides had used threats to halt Congressional investigation at Fort Monmouth, that thus far, the facts showed that Secretary Stevens was having difficulty proving his charges while at the same time tending to establish the charges made by the Senator, by admitting for the record that he had asked that the investigation at Fort Monmouth be suspended.

Through attempted paraphrase, he has the issues somewhat backward, by the way, as the actual primary issues before the subcommittee were whether the Senator, through Mr. Cohn as a conduit, had used threats of adverse action against Secretary Stevens to obtain first a pre-draft officer's commission for Mr. Schine, a friend of Mr. Cohn and former unpaid aide of the subcommittee, and, post-draft, special treatment as a private, excuse from routine kitchen duty on weekends and assignment instead to work on behalf of the subcommittee in investigation of Communists in the Army; and then the contention by Senator McCarthy that the Army, in its February report of such conduct by the Senator and Mr. Cohn to the subcommittee, was trying to "blackmail" the Senator into relenting in his investigation of Communists at Fort Monmouth, an important Signal Intelligence radar research facility, which the subcommittee had undertaken the prior fall, the subcommittee's majority report on the matter having concluded the prior December that there was no evidence of such Communist infiltration.

That was the narrow focus. The unstated actual controversy being investigated was whether Senator McCarthy was a nut, exploiting the known public fears of Communists and Communism with false charges of Communist infiltration here, there and everywhere in the country, the politics of division to achieve political popularity, having finally gone too far in his Machiavellian resolve with his claims against the Army, after having attacked the State Department and other executive branch departments and agencies relentlessly since February, 1950, begun as a routine RNC assignment for a Lincoln Day speech, seeking generally to destroy reputationally and, if possible, noose with Communism or sympathy therewith, anyone who dared challenge him publicly, the technique of dictators.

A letter writer, who identifies him or herself as "Charlotte Patient", indicates that it was good that someone was making an issue of hospital visiting, as it was not good for patients because of the level of noise during visiting hours. The writer hopes that the newspaper would help in the campaign, as the writer had experienced increased temperature and more illness after such visits during the four-hour period each day, and favors its complete elimination, saying that the parking lot of the hospital, in which he or she had been hospitalized recently, had reminded during visiting hours of a football game between Duke and Carolina.

But the question is which team would represent the patients who got well and which, the patients who did not. We have our ideas. What are yours? Do not say simply, by way of cryptic answer, "code blue", as that could apply to both schools. Hint: One school has as its mascot a Blue Devil, while the other has a Ram, sometimes with black hooves. Each fall, the victory bell, painted the appropriate color, goes to the survivor. We were there at the very first match.

Framed Edition
[Return to Links
Page by Subject] [Return to Links-Page by Date] [Return to News<i><i><i>—</i></i></i>Framed Edition]
Links-Date Links-Subj.